Abuse of Rights in English Contract Law: Hidden in Plain Sight?

Solène Rowan*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The article argues that the fetters on the exercise of unilateral contractual discretionary powers that were defined in Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and the limits on damages clauses as redefined in Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi are imposed to prevent the abuse of contractual rights or freedoms and this is suggestive that a broader principle against the abuse of rights might be at work in English contract law. Whilst English law has traditionally been understood as rejecting a free-standing and general doctrine of abuse of rights, the article explains why this should not be regarded as an obstacle to the proposed analysis. In both the context of contractual discretion and damages clauses, the central importance of abuse is evident from the tests that are applied, the factors that the authorities tell us are relevant to their application and both the high bar for the court to intervene and the flexibility of the relevant standards, which filter out only the most egregious and inadmissible cases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1066-1092
Number of pages27
JournalModern Law Review
Volume84
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Abuse of Rights in English Contract Law: Hidden in Plain Sight?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this